Broadening the Contraception Debate Through Lies

Broadening the Contraception Debate Through Lies

Washington : DC : USA | Mar 03, 2012 at 5:19 AM PST
Views: Pending
Catholic Bishops Attack on Contraception...Which 98% of Catholics Use

The contraception debate, which ensued after President Obama had his Administration press a decision demanding that Catholic owned and/or run institutions such as Hospital, Schools and other institutions where non-Catholics were employed would be required by the Affordable Care Act of 2010 (Obama Care) to offer free contraception services as part of insurance coverage for their employees, has become a pressing issue where the arguments have been blurred and muddled with lies. The debate has been expanded to imply that the Catholic Church is fighting not simply to hold the line on their faith which does not allow for them to offer such coverage, but is dead-set to deny women’s right to choose and deny women to decide on decisions concerning their own bodies. This has expanded the debate to, by slanted implication, to include abortion as part of the debate which was not part of the original debate. The core of the debate is whether or not the Federal Government can force the Catholic Church, and other similarly aligned religious institutions, to provide free contraceptive health coverage despite their religious canon making such a sin. So, what exactly are the lies being used to distort this debate?

The largest exaggeration in this debate is that the Catholic Church is denying women of their right to use birth control. This is not the position of the Catholic Church as they simply hold that they advise Catholic women not to sin and that contraception is defined by the Catholic Church as a sin. They are not refusing to allow women from using contraceptives any more than they are refusing to allow any Catholic from breaking any other laws of the Church. The Catholic Church position is that they should not be forced to pay for or provide the means of committing sins as part of their offering services under Church employment. The Church looks upon their hospitals and schools as doing G-d’s work and a blessing performed by the Church through these institutions and in the desire to serve, offer all services to the entire public. The Catholic Church believes this is an essential part of their outreach and exemplifying the meaning of service under their beliefs. These institutions are as much a form of holy enterprise similar as the Churches themselves and seen as being similar in holiness and under the same laws and canon of the Church. It is this consideration which is the reasoning behind why the Catholic Church holds these institutions cannot be forced to provide the means of sin under the protection in the First Amendment’s guarantees against “impeding the free exercise of religion.”

But, what will be the further expansions which will logically proceed from this case? The most immediate expansion will be to every other religious institution being forced initially to provide these same full and free contraceptive services under their health coverage even if doing such violates their religious laws and beliefs. This will affect many Jewish institutions just as it does the Catholic Church as Judaism has similar opinions when it comes to many of these very same issues. The Protestant and Mormon religious institutions are also in this same ship receiving broadside attacks from President Obama and the Departments of Health and eventually Justice. Once this foothold has been established, which further guarantees promised by the Constitution and the Bill of Rights will be negated through Federal Government edicts and regulations and other forms of coercion. Allowing this to stand can and will serve as the crowbar with which all our protected rights will become vulnerable to government aggression.

There is one other way of perceiving this debate which is becoming more appropriate and will define some of the underlying attack on many of our rights and freedoms. Ihis demand is really an attempt to erase the Judeo-Christian ethos of our society and replace it with an alternative religious ethos of Secular Humanism. When liberals scoff at classifying Secular Humanism being a religion, they deny it having such a classification, as Secular Humanism lacks a deity and thus cannot be a religion. By this argument Buddhism, Hinduism, and other religious philosophies which do not have a deity would no longer be considered religions. This would deny these religious institutions Constitutional protections under the First Amendment if part of the requirement for a religion is the belief in a deity. Perhaps we should go to the dictionary for the definition of “religion” where we find the following:

1) A set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, especially when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs.

2) A specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects: the Christian religion; the Buddhist religion.

3) The body of persons adhering to a particular set of beliefs and practices: a world council of religions.

The definition I would put in words from this is a religion is any philosophy which has a set canon or set of laws which is believed to be valid and is followed by a group under a general sense of harmony and agreement. It sure sounds as if Secular Humanism fits the definition of a religion even if it is a recently formed religion and is still finalizing their canon. It is definitely a philosophy with an ardent and strict following who, unlike Judaism and most of Christianity, do not accept disagreement. Secular Humanists preach universal acceptance but only for those who accept and believe completely their dogmas. This latest attack, which has begun with the Catholic Church but will not end there, is simply another attempt to squelch and silence any person or institution which stands separate and possibly opposed to the Church of Secular Humanism. Do not be fooled by the claims of this being simply equal treatment under the law. This is anything but equal treatment under the law. This is use of the law as a battering-ram in an attempt to abolish any alternative to the new world religion of Secular Humanism. Universal contraception and full reproductive rights are simply part of the basic tenets canonized in the laws of Secular Humanism, and it is the decree of the new progressives that all shall worship at the Church of Secular Humanism.

Beyond the Cusp

beyondthecusp is based in Paw Paw, Michigan, United States of America, and is an Anchor on Allvoices.
Report Credibility
  • Clear
  • Share:
  • Share
  • Clear
  • Clear
  • Clear
  • Clear

News Stories




More From Allvoices

Report Your News Got a similar story?
Add it to the network!

Or add related content to this report

Use of this site is governed by our Terms of Use Agreement and Privacy Policy.

© Allvoices, Inc. 2008-2014. All rights reserved. Powered by PulsePoint.